震撼教育 Just Give In?

Psychologies investigates the beauty industry’s philanthropic offerings to find out if our money is really doing any good

BY JO FAIRLEY

Maybe it’s down to a childhood spent watching Blue Peter, collecting socks or jumpers to dispatch to Africa, but I’ve always tried to do my bit for charity (FYI, my main effort over the past 11 years has been helping a simple, no-cost-to-anyone scheme that offers self-esteem workshops to homeless women at Centrepoint). And, like most women, I’ve been known to get a bit of a feel-good frisson when purchasing a beauty product that promises to help a good cause. Which, these days, is a lot of the time — each week, my inbox gets a mini-tsunami of emails about fund-raising, charitable or Fairtrade product launches.

In one way, I’m thrilled. Something — even a small sliver of cash that would otherwise just go to swelling a brand’s coffers — is better than nothing. But all gorgeous fund-raising goodies are not created equal, and I am careful now to read between the lines on packaging to dig out the truth about just how much any product is going to benefit a good cause.

In a perfect world, all proceeds are donated. Not profits, proceeds, such as those from MAC’s long-term Viva Glam lipstick project. Every penny goes towards helping those living with and affected by HIV and AIDS. Aveda Earth Month candles almost fall into this category, too, save the 20 per cent taken by the VAT man, of course. Even if the product is labelled ‘all profits to charity’, such are the ways of savvy accounting that a product may not always make a profit, in which case the brand benefits from a ‘halo’ effect without having to dip into its coffers.

When it comes to the amount of profit going to a cause, nothing less than 100% will push my button. For example, Trilogy Helping Hand Wash has been giving total profits to help offer a future to Ugandan orphans through the Child’s-I Foundation. If I read that just 10 per cent of net profits go to a cause then yes, it’s much better than nothing — but that may not translate to great changes on that charity’s frontline.

Scrutinising the claims

What I am privileged to know from creating the chocolate brand Green & Black’s (the UK’s first Fairtrade-marked product) is that money can go a long, long way in the developing world, and make a real difference. But, like food, when it comes to Fairtrade cosmetics, I also know to look out for an official symbol that guarantees ingredients have been traced from field or forest directly to the face cream / body wash / foot treat they purport to contain, rather than settle for a brand’s ‘aren’t-we-fabulous?’ sourcing statement.

The beauty industry’s annual charitable thrust is Pink Ribbon month in October. Personally, I have mixed feelings about it. Although never wishing to undermine the efforts of the wonderful late Evelyn Lauder to raise money for breast cancer research, and wholeheartedly supporting the Look Good, Feel Better charity’s makeover workshops for women undergoing cancer treatment, I feel there’s a lot of pink bandwagoning going on elsewhere. It’s maybe because cancer is such an emotive word. Suddenly, pink ribbons appear on everything from tweezers to lip glosses with no real rules about how much of the sale price goes to charity. So over the years, I’ve learned not just to scrutinise ingredients, but examine ‘pink’ claims, too, and to make up my own mind.

How beautiful is the cause?

I have a sneaking admiration, then, for brands that try to do something for less touchy-feely causes. The Jo Malone garden recently unveiled in London’s Battersea Park may have been a petal-perfect fit with the brand’s fragrance identity, but it came about through a partnership with Thrive, the horticultural therapy charity that works with individuals facing mental and emotional challenges. This is not an area on which the industry tends to focus. Clarins, too, deserves a pat on the back for its annual Dynamisante Woman Of The Year Award (which I’ve helped judge from the start). Every year, £30,000 is given to a charity founded by women to help children at home or abroad, often in difficult, distinctly unglamorous situations.

I also like it when the industry gets off its backside on a grand scale, as with John Frieda’s HairRaising charity, which raised more than £1 million for Great Ormond Street children’s hospital, not just by snipping clients’ hair, but inspiring hundreds of hairdressers to get on their bikes and cycle for the cause.

I try not to be cynical about major brands’ efforts, whether it’s supporting traditional medicine from India, while sourcing a precious anti-ageing ingredient, or using Community Traded honey from Ethiopia in a shimmering body oil. Because corporate social responsibility is putting pressure on beauty companies who don’t donate to charity to pull up their Peruvian hand-knitted Fairtrade alpacas socks.

What I’ve experienced is that business really can change the world. The beauty industry can certainly afford to do its bit and more. Much, much more. As for all those feel-good launches I’m overwhelmed with? My inner Blue Peter-viewer says, ‘Bring them on.’ Provided I’m occasionally allowed to take the ‘we’re-so-generous’ claims with a pinch of (exfoliating) sea salt, that is, separating the genuine philanthropists from those who may be more focused on what a charity tie-up might do for their bottom line.

But my bottom line is I still tend to like it when beauty gives back. Because even now, all too often, beauty doesn’t.